Bail Granted Under SC/ST Act As Accused Not Required For Further Investigation & Has No Criminal Antecedents: Karnataka HC - 2025-07-01

Karnataka HC Grants Bail in SC/ST Act Case, Cites No Need for Further Custodial Investigation

Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court recently granted bail to a man accused of sexual assault under the promise of marriage and caste-based humiliation, observing that his continued detention was not necessary for the investigation.

Justice M GUma , presiding over a single-judge bench, allowed the criminal appeal filed by the accused, Varun Yadav .J. , under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Case Background

The case, registered as Crime No.116/2025 at Kodigehalli Police Station, was initiated based on a complaint by a 26-year-old woman, Shyalaja N.S. The First Information Report (FIR) accused Varun Yadav of committing sexual assault on the pretext of marriage and publicly humiliating the complainant by referencing her caste.

Consequently, the appellant was charged under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(2)(v), and 3(1)(w) of the SC/ST Act, along with several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), including Sections 3(5), 318(2), 352, and 69. The appellant was arrested on May 1, 2025, and had been in judicial custody since.

Court's Reasoning for Granting Bail

The central question before the High Court was whether the appellant was entitled to bail. After hearing arguments from both the appellant's counsel, Smt. Monica Patil , and the High Court Government Pleader, Sri. Harish Ganapathy, the court answered in the affirmative.

Justice Uma highlighted several key factors in the judgment that warranted the grant of bail:

Investigation Complete: The court noted that "the appellant is not required for further investigation."

No Flight Risk: The primary purpose of detention, to ensure the accused's presence at trial, could be achieved through stringent bail conditions.

No Criminal Antecedents: The prosecution did not contend that the appellant had any prior criminal history.

The court reasoned, “He is also not required to be detained in custody for any other purpose except to ensure his presence before the Trial Court... Therefore, I am of the opinion, that the appellant may be granted bail subject to conditions which will take care of the interest of the prosecution as well as interest of the complainant and the witnesses.”

Final Order and Conditions

The High Court allowed the appeal and ordered the appellant to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹2,00,000 with two sureties for the same amount. The release is subject to several conditions, including:

The appellant must not commit similar offences.

He shall not threaten or tamper with prosecution witnesses.

He must appear before the Trial Court as and when required.

The court further directed that the prosecution is free to seek cancellation of bail if any of these conditions are violated. The Trial Court was also given the liberty to verify the authenticity of the documents furnished by the appellant and his sureties before finalizing the release.